Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/27/1996 01:36 PM Senate TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE TRANSPORTATION
February 27, 1996
1:36 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Steve Rieger, Chairman
Senator Robin Taylor, Vice Chair
Senator Lyda Green
Senator Al Adams
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present.
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 57
"An Act relating to driver's licensing; and providing for an
effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 274
"An Act relating to the noise levels of airports and sport shooting
facilities."
PREVIOUS SENATE ACTION
HB 57 - See Senate Transportation minutes dated 2/22/96.
SB 274 - No previous action to record.
WITNESS REGISTER
Darcy Duvlea
500 Windsor Drive
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
POSITION STATEMENT: Raised questions regarding HB 57.
Josh Steadman
PO Box 2165
Valdez, Alaska 99686
POSITION STATEMENT: Thought HB 57 was a good bill.
Representative Joe Green, Prime Sponsor
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions.
Juanita Hensley, Chief
Drivers Services
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Public Safety
PO Box 20020
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0020
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions.
Mark Johnson, Chief
Community Health & Emergency Medical Services
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110616
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0616
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 57.
Senator Halford, Prime Sponsor
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained SB 274.
Sam Kito III, Legislative Liaison
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Asked why state airports were not included.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 96-4, SIDE A
STRA - 2/27/96
HB 57 LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR DRIVERS
CHAIRMAN RIEGER called the Senate Transportation meeting to order
at 1:36 p.m. and introduced HB 57 as the first order of business.
Number 011
DARCY DUVLEA, Senior at Wasilla High School, pointed out that HB 57
places a curfew on 18 to 20-year-olds that have provisional
licenses; that places a curfew on an adult. She did not believe
this curfew to be reasonable when 18-year-olds can serve in the
military. Perhaps, there could be an alternative to the
provisional license for those over the age of 18. She believed
that the provisional license would decrease the accidents for 16 to
20-year-olds.
Ms. Duvlea informed the committee that Representative Green's
office had provided the information from which the bill was based.
That information included statistics from 1993 which stated that 32
percent of youth drivers are involved in crashes between the hours
of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. She pointed out that the time period
between 12:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. was not grouped together. During
that time period, 41 percent of the crashes occur. Drivers age 16-
20 comprise 12.8 percent of the total crashes while drivers age 31-
35 comprise 12.3 percent of the total traffic crashes. That .5
percent difference did not seem to be proportionally significant.
Number 062
Ms. Duvlea informed the committee that other states with curfews
apply the curfew to youth age 18 and younger. Six states have a
type of nighttime restriction: Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania. HB 57 is not a bad
bill, but the statistics from which the bill is based are three
years old. Ms. Duvlea suggested that driver's education could be
required at the driver's expense.
SENATOR ADAMS referred Ms. Duvlea to page 3, lines 12-16 when he
asked if she agreed with the change from 12 points for suspension
of license to six points. DARCY DUVLEA indicated that enforcement
of the curfew would be difficult and would require increased police
patrol. Would people be pulled over because they looked young?
Ms. Duvlea was unclear as to how long the provisional license would
be revoked for a person holding a provisional license that had
accumulated six points.
Number 118
SENATOR TAYLOR congratulated Ms. Duvlea on her research and work on
HB 57.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER thanked Ms. Duvlea for her testimony and welcomed
Representative Joe Green to sit at the table.
JOSH STEADMAN, student from Valdez, believed HB 57 to be a good
bill. The fiscal notes illustrate that the bill would generate
revenue; is that the reason for the bill?
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN, Prime Sponsor, said that HB 57 has nothing to
do with generating money. HB 57 is concerned with safety, carnage,
and death.
Number 147
JOSH STEADMAN pointed out that committee minutes included a report
which stated that California and Maryland reported only a five
percent reduction in crashes involving 15 to 17-year-olds after
establishing a graduated license program. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN
asked Mr. Steadman if he were part of that five percent, would it
be worth it? JOSH STEADMAN said that HB 57 is a good bill.
JOSH STEADMAN suggested that driver's education could replace the
instructional permit or could be offered as an alternative.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN pointed out that the figures to which Mr.
Steadman referred earlier were actually the cost of implementation
not revenue. Instituting a driver's education program would be
extremely expensive. Representative Green said that the amount of
education does not matter, the important factor is how the vehicle
is actually operated. A vehicle is a killing machine.
JOSH STEADMAN viewed the provisional license as a second permit
with a curfew. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated that the early hours of
the morning are when the most accidents occur as well as the fact
that the accident rate for young drivers is about twice as much as
that for adult drivers. HB 57 is a two prong attempt to make young
people realize that an automobile can kill.
Number 192
JOSH STEADMAN inquired as to the reasoning behind the change in age
of the accompanying driver from age 19 to 25. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN
explained that there is a statistical advantage for the
accompanying driver to be 25. Statistically, 25-year-olds have
less per capita carnage than at age 19. If a person is learning to
drive, he/she should learn from someone illustrating
responsibility.
SENATOR LINCOLN did not believe that driver's education through the
school system was available. She related her experience with her
children who utilized driver's education and received a cheaper
insurance rate because of that education. Senator Lincoln did not
believe that driver's education was available in Valdez; she asked
how Mr. Steadman and his friends would be taught to drive?
JOSH STEADMAN affirmed that the driving portion of driver's
education had been eliminated in Valdez. Currently, a semester is
spent learning the book portion of driver's education. In the
summer, the driving portion is offered for about $300. Mr.
Steadman asked if the driving portion of driver's education was
eliminated across the state. SENATOR LINCOLN did not know.
Number 230
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN pointed out that Juanita Hensley was present
and could perhaps, better answer such questions.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked Mr. Steadman if he had an opinion regarding
the six points. JOSH STEADMAN felt that six points could be
reached quickly, for example, drinking and driving. Mr. Steadman
reiterated that six points could be reached quickly.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the point system should be left at 12
so that a teenager could drink and drive at least one time. JOSH
STEADMAN said no.
Number 248
JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief of Drivers Services with the DMV, offered to
answer any questions from the committee.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if someone with a suspended license would
automatically be subject to SR 22.
JUANITA HENSLEY specified that a person would be subject to SR 22
if the violation involved a moving motor vehicle. She pointed out
that the "use it or lose it" legislation passed a couple of years
ago included an exemption for SR 22 because it did not require the
use of a motor vehicle to have the license revoked. A court
revocation of a license also does not apply to SR 22 for the
aforementioned reason. She explained that SR 22 is a form number
given by the insurance industry to file with the motor vehicle
agencies throughout the nation. SR 22 in Alaska is the basic
limits of liability required for anyone to hold a driver's license.
Any time that a license is suspended or revoked due to a points
violation, SR 22 would be required in order to obtain the license
again.
Number 277
Ms. Hensley explained that once six points is reached in a 12 month
period under the current system, the DMV is required to send a
warning notice. At this point, the individual could take a
defensive driving course in order to reduce his/her total points by
two. The division sent 17,000 warning letters last year informing
individuals that they had reached the halfway point and advising
them to take part in the defensive driving course. Only 2,500
license were suspended. Ms. Hensley emphasized that the division
does not like to reach the point of suspending someone's license.
Under HB 57, a young person would receive a warning letter when
he/she receives three points. At that time, the young person could
participate in a defensive driving course and reduce his/her total
points by two. If the young person reaches the point of
suspension, six points, he/she would receive 30 days notice to take
a defensive driving course in order to receive a two point
reduction in their total points. Taking a defensive driving course
is advantageous to the young person as well as the DMV.
Number 316
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked Ms. Hensley if she had an estimate of the
difference of the premium per year for a driver insured under an
average SR 22 policy as compared to a driver covered under the
family's policy as a youth. JUANITA HENSLEY did not have that
information. As a parent, Ms. Hensley noted that factors such as
the age and cost of the vehicle, the age of the parents, the grade
point average of the youth, and whether the youth took a driver's
education course effected the cost of the policy.
SENATOR GREEN understood that the SR 22 premium was approximately
a 10 percent on property and bodily damage plus the surcharge. She
indicated that transferring back to normal coverage from the SR 22
was cumbersome. JUANITA HENSLEY interjected that those who must
file SR 22 are habitual problem drivers. Such drivers cost the
state and individuals a lot of money.
Number 343
SENATOR LINCOLN believed that Ms. Hensley meant that the majority
of folks with SR 22 are the habitual problem drivers. She related
the following scenario in which the person does not fall into the
normal categories associated with SR 22 drivers. A person driving
another person's vehicle, not knowing that the owner did not have
automobile insurance, could be hit by someone else; such a person
still has to get SR 22 insurance. Furthermore, an inebriated youth
behind the wheel of an automobile, even if he/she is not driving,
would fall under SR 22. Senator Lincoln requested that Ms. Hensley
provide her office with the statistics to which she referred.
With regards to the defensive driving course, Senator Lincoln
expressed concern that the course is not available in rural or bush
communities. People in those communities would have to travel to
an urban area for the course as well as the driver's training; that
would be cost prohibitive.
JUANITA HENSLEY informed the committee that some areas offer
defensive driving courses through correspondence courses. In order
to have the course approved, the curriculum and outline would need
to be submitted to the division for approval. The course is
available, it's a matter of whether someone would monitor and
return the courses to bush and rural areas.
Number 390
SENATOR TAYLOR inquired as to how many states have adopted the
"Cinderella Law" to which Ms. Duvlea referred. JUANITA HENSLEY
said that there are currently two stages of a graduated license
program in the U.S. Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, and Vermont have
at least five components of a full graduated license program.
Three states have three components of a full graduated license
program. In all, approximately 16 states have some form of a
graduated license program.
SENATOR TAYLOR indicated that Alaska would qualify for the
graduated license program now because a 14-year-old can obtain a
driver's license to operate a certain horsepower level scooter and
then move to a learner's permit and then the license at 16.
JUANITA HENSLEY clarified that a instruction permit is permissible.
With regards to the motor scooter, a young person can only operate
a scooter with less than 50 cc until the age of 16. Ms. Hensley
pointed out that the Province of Ontario includes every age, any
new applicant, in their graduated driver's license. Every new
applicant must go through an 18 month period of the same
restrictions proposed in HB 57. Ms. Hensley expressed concern with
Alaska's transient population which may become licensed in their
local area without training, now they can drive anywhere - L.A.,
Seattle, Washington, D.C. She did not believe that it could be
determined how such an individual would drive in those situations.
SENATOR TAYLOR emphasized that the knowledge of whether these
drivers are succeeding or failing is known. However, the knowledge
of the extent to which the driver's proficiency would increase
under this system is not known. He asked Ms. Hensley if the
numbers to which Ms. Duvlea referred to earlier were correct. What
are the statistics from other states which were used to justify the
implementation of the graduated license program?
Number 421
JUANITA HENSLEY reported the following information:
* California and Maryland had a five percent reduction in
crashes for drivers age 15-17;
* Maryland had a 10 percent reduction in traffic convictions
for ages 16-17;
* Oregon had a 16 percent reduction in crashes for male
drivers ages 16-17.
With regard to Alaska, 16 to 20-year-olds represent 6.2 percent of
the licensed drivers in the state, however, they account for 12.9
percent of the total traffic crashes in Alaska. Also 28.8 percent
of the total fatal crashes involved that age group.
SENATOR TAYLOR surmised that about six percent of the driving
population is having 12 percent of the crashes. Therefore, 16 to
20-year-olds are crashing at twice the rate as the rest of the
driving population. Are there similar statistics for other age
groups?
JUANITA HENSLEY said that she could have a statistical report
prepared. Nationwide, ages 16-20 are the most troublesome age
group; they are issued the most traffic citations, their insurance
rates are higher and they are involved in more serious accidents.
The number of miles driven must also be reviewed. She offered to
provide the committee with national statistics as well as Alaskan
statistics.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if there was a time when the 12 points
accumulated over a period of three or four years. JUANITA HENSLEY
replied no, there has been either 12 points in a 12 month period or
18 points in a 24 month period. In response to Senator Taylor, Ms.
Hensley said that a curfew violation would result in a two point
penalty. The curfew violation would be driving in violation of a
restricted driver's license which is the same as a driver's license
restriction to wear corrective lenses. Ms. Hensley reiterated that
a youth reaching the six point level could take a defensive driving
course in order to have two points credited to his/her license.
Number 471
SENATOR GREEN asked if the SR 22 coverage could be waived when a
license is reissued. JUANITA HENSLEY explained that the SR 22
requirement is set in statute, therefore the only way would be to
waive the requirement by statute.
SENATOR GREEN asked if there were any violations, such as a curfew
violation, which should not have the SR 22 coverage attached.
JUANITA HENSLEY clarified that points are based on the severity and
potential to cause injury and fatalities. For instance, speeding
through a school zone carries six points. Drunk driving and
reckless driving both carry 10 points as well as revocation of the
license. In those two cases, the court would revoke a person's
license regardless of the number of points.
SENATOR TAYLOR stated that doing three miles per hour over the
speed limit would be a two point violation. Two such violations
would amount to four points, a curfew violation would place the
youth at the six point limit. Would the youth be entitled to a
jury trial since a license and a privilege would be revoked?
JUANITA HENSLEY pointed out that the violation would not cause the
loss of the driver's license, but rather the accumulation of
violations.
Number 506
SENATOR TAYLOR informed everyone that there is a bill in House
Finance in which the Department of Law has determined that if a
judge revokes or suspends a person's driver's license because of
failure to pay traffic fines, that person is retroactively entitled
to a jury trial. That bill also has a $160,000 fiscal note. He
was confused due to the conflicting information from the
Administration.
JUANITA HENSLEY clarified that the points system is an
administrative suspension of a driver's license and does not fall
under the recommendations of a jury trial. The individual does
have the right to an administrative hearing in order to contest the
suspension of their license for point accumulation. Currently,
very few people contest the loss of license due to point
accumulation. A person cannot contest a violation for which he/she
has already been convicted, the person can only contest the fact
that his/her driver's license is being suspended. Ms. Hensley
estimated that less than five such hearings occur per year.
In response to Senator Taylor, JUANITA HENSLEY explained that when
the third citation is received, as well as a points notice, that
informs the person that his/her license is being suspended. By
current law, the person must be informed that he/she has 30 days
before the suspension takes affect. Within that 30 days, the
person could take the defensive driving course and reduce their
points by two which would nullify the suspension. Ms. Hensley
emphasized that the division does not like to reach the point of
suspending licenses because it is not cost effective. In response
to Senator Green, Ms. Hensley clarified that the defensive driving
course can only be taken once in a 12 month period.
Number 548
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if the previous testimony stating that other
states with the "Cinderella Law" only apply to those under 18 years
of age was correct. JUANITA HENSLEY pointed out that Ontario has
no tolerance for any age. CHAIRMAN RIEGER rephrased his question;
are there any states that apply the "Cinderella Law" to those 18
and older? JUANITA HENSLEY stated that it varies from state to
state.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said that he had not heard a state yet that applied
to youth 18 or over; is there one? JUANITA HENSLEY noted that
California has a minimum age of 18 to receive a full license.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER repeated his question regarding those states which
have a "Cinderella Law" that applies to 18-year-olds or do all the
states apply to those 17 years of age and under? JUANITA HENSLEY
informed the committee of the minimum age to receive a license in
the following states: Colorado - under 21, Massachusetts - 18
years old, New York - 17 years old, Oregon - 18 years old,
Pennsylvania -17 years old, Vermont - 18 years old, and Wisconsin -
18 years old. HB 57 would allow a youth to receive a full license
at the age of 17 in Alaska providing that the youth went through
the instructional permit and the provisional stage.
TAPE 96-4, SIDE B
CHAIRMAN RIEGER surmised that anyone under 21 in Colorado would be
subject to a curfew when driving.
JUANITA HENSLEY reported that Colorado does not have a nighttime
restriction. Colorado does not have a full graduated license
program. In order to receive a license in Colorado, the person
must have had driver's education, a visually distinct driver's
license, a mandatory seatbelt, a learner's permit, and been through
an intermediate stage. Those are all required up to age 21.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said then that in Colorado, one could have a
restricted license with regards to the driver's education
requirement and the different color of the license. JUANITA
HENSLEY added that the learner's permit and intermediate stage
would also be necessary. She offered to provide the committee with
this information.
Number 575
SENATOR TAYLOR reiterated Ms. Hensley's comment that a 17-year-old
could receive a full driver's license when asking; would that 17-
year-old still be restricted with regard to the "Cinderella Law"?
JUANITA HENSLEY replied not under a full license. SENATOR TAYLOR
believed that a full license would be obtained at age 17 and a
half. JUANITA HENSLEY explained that an instruction permit could
be obtained at age 14 which could be held for two years. At age
16, a provisional license could be obtained which must be held for
one year. Therefore, at age 17 an unrestricted full license could
be obtained.
JOANNA FIMPLE, student from Glennallen and Eureka, felt that HB 57
was discriminating against youth. The "Cinderella Law" could
actually take away power from the parents. She felt it unfortunate
that these restrictions must be placed on the new driver. Driving
is a privilege and one becomes better with experience. Ms. Fimple
did not believe that there should be a change in the driver's
license procedure. However, it is unfortunate that deaths occur
due to car accidents, but accidents occur even with those who have
driven many years.
SENATOR LINCOLN appreciated Ms. Fimple's testimony. She informed
the committee that she had held a teleconference with people in
Glennallen regarding their opinions of HB 57. Senator Lincoln
agreed that all the lives that could be saved should be, no matter
the age. Too often, youth are isolated and categorized as those
causing violent crimes, deaths, etc. Senator Lincoln did not want
to categorize young people as terrible drivers because a great
number of young people are responsible. If HB 57 saves a life,
then it is worth it. However, the bill is unfair to the good young
drivers with regards to the curfew provision.
Number 518
MARK JOHNSON, Chief of Community Health & Emergency Medical
Services, said that he had a chart which clarifies that teenagers
are the most dangerous drivers on the highway. He offered to share
this information with the committee. The hospital records in
Alaska, illustrate that 24 percent of the youth in accidents were
drinking at the time of the injury. The average cost of
hospitalization for the injured youth is $20,000 per patient. Mr.
Johnson informed the committee that 40 percent of the youth
fatalities are motor vehicle related.
Driver's education has been studied in the East. Those studies
determined that those districts having driver's education in
schools experienced more accidents, injuries, and fatalities than
those districts without driver's education. Mr. Johnson explained
that the study found that more high school aged youth would obtain
their license after having the driver's education than in the
school districts without driver's education. The study concluded
that high school aged youth, regardless of participation in
driver's education, was the most dangerous age group on the road.
From a public health perspective, Mr. Johnson supported HB 57.
Number 493
SENATOR GREEN said that the problem seems to be with the points.
Perhaps, eight points could be the solution. Senator Green moved
that on page 3, line 15, the word " six " be deleted and "eight" be
added.
SENATOR LINCOLN thought that Senator Adams had intended to make a
motion to change the points to 10. She did not know the difference
between eight points versus 10 points. Senator Lincoln supported
an increase over the six points, but seemed to be unsure as to
whether it should be eight or 10.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER noted that HB 57 would be heard in Senate Judiciary
next and then Senate Finance.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER mentioned that running a stop sign at 1:30 a.m.
would use all six points. JUANITA HENSLEY interjected that there
may be two violations, but points would only be assessed for one
violation since they occurred at the same time.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN pointed out that his scenario assumed that the
youth was not going between work and home in the most direct route.
Hearing no objection, the amendment was adopted.
SENATOR TAYLOR moved that the effective date be changed from
"January 1, 1996" to "January 1, 1997." Hearing no objection, the
motion passed.
SENATOR GREEN moved that SCS HB 57(TRA) be moved out of committee
with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.
STRA - 2/27/96
SB 274 NOISE AT AIRPORTS & SPORT SHOOTING RANGES
Number 455
CHAIRMAN RIEGER introduced SB 274 as the next order of business
before the committee.
SENATOR HALFORD, Prime Sponsor, noted that the committee packet
should contain the sponsor statement, zero fiscal notes, and
letters of support from various groups. SB 274 would prohibit
suits against existing airports and sport shooting ranges for noise
nuisance. Noise cannot be used to sue facilities that predated the
objections.
SENATOR LINCOLN assumed that the sponsor statement's reference to
the population shift from urban to rural referred to the lower 48,
not Alaska. SENATOR HALFORD replied yes.
SENATOR HALFORD acknowledged that this is not a significant problem
in Alaska yet. The objective is to establish a policy in order to
eliminate the possibility of this becoming a problem. In response
to Senator Lincoln, Senator Halford stated that he had not seen a
specific example of this. There may be some areas that receive
complaints after the fact.
Number 424
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if a municipality could not maintain an
action or does it refer only to an individual. SENATOR HALFORD
clarified that it would be exempt from a noise ordinance after the
fact. Senator Halford intended that all considerations other than
noise would remain available.
SENATOR GREEN asked if heliports should be specifically included as
suggested in the letter from the Alaska Air Carriers Association.
SENATOR HALFORD supported the inclusion of helicopter operations.
The drafter has suggested that a conceptual amendment could be used
to add a definition of "aircraft" which would include rotorcraft.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if the definition of sport shooting facility
referred to that being the primary operation of the facility.
SENATOR HALFORD assumed that it could also be an incidental
operation. That is a legal question.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if the facility's sport shooting was
incidental, would changing the definition to specify that the sport
shooting must be the primary use of the facility would constitute
a substantial change in the use of the facility. SENATOR HALFORD
suggested that it would constitute a change of use. Senator
Halford reiterated that this only applies to noise considerations.
Number 379
SAM KITO III, Legislative Liaison for the Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities, said that the department has
some general concerns which could be addressed by the Federal
Aviation Administration. Mr. Kito asked the committee why state
airports were not included.
There was discussion about how to deal with the conceptual
amendment.
SENATOR GREEN moved the following amendment: page 2, line 29,
after "aircraft," add "including fixed wing or rotorcraft".
Hearing no objection, the amendment was adopted.
SENATOR GREEN moved that CSSB 274 (TRA) be moved out of committee
with individual recommendations. Hearing no objection, it was so
ordered.
There being no further business before the committee, the meeting
was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|